Moreover, capitalism assumes all people are honest and not one has more greed / ambition then the other. A totally unrealistic concept.As history has shown, any attempt at real capitalism ends up with the emergence of a monopolist economy that without the chance of the individual to succeed and that leads to government regulations and crony capitalism and this leads to fascism or in the extreme the pendulum will swing to socialism / communism… All of them end with the top couple percent of people owning everything and the rest existing just to support them waiting throughout their whole life for trickle down riches..

Yes, yes, yes!

So what you are really saying John, unbeknownst to you, is that; “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people!” Capitalism, naturally, will be abused by some, but to suggest that capitalism is the root cause of greed and all degenerate behaviour, conveniently excuses the very ones who abuse it! So in order to prevent a few from abusing it, you therefore advocate for its replacement? Am i understanding you correctly? The notion, that because some will abuse freedom, therefore freedom must be controlled, is a notion i find most odious! The issue here is not the virtues, or the evils of capitalism, but rather, a question of individual character! Oh behave!

That is not necessarily the case. Simply put, there are several models of the cosmos: Open, Flat, and Closed. In two of the three, infinite space-time change (expansion or contraction) may be possible. It is currently indeterminate which of the three (if any) is the best approximate model. Infinite growth may be achievable.

By the way, where did you study physics? This is a sincere question, not intended as an ad hominem attack.

If what you say is true, we should then pursue none of the above, and eliminate all. Yes? With what, i shudder, will you fill the vacuum? Pray-tell!

It’s not your tent Dave and how am I forcing you to do anything?

I can always count on you Dave to negate everything I put forth and name calling. You know nothing about me so please don’t claim to know who I am or what I have or currently advocate. Can you factually debunk anything I have put forth or will you just resort to unfounded accusations as you usually do?

Are you that scared of alternative ideas Dave?

I am sorry for the people who still don’t know that we are past peak oil or that we are running out of clean water or that rare metals’s are in short or that our top soil is gone. See the movie “Dirt”.

And yes Dave I try to put my money where my mouth is. I put 71 solar panels on my house last year and I am now looking to install a solar evacuated hot water system that will provide hot water, baseboard heat, and heat my hot tub for my duplex house. The following year the technology will also allow use of that heat in the summer for Geothermal heat pump for my air conditioning. And I work from home for the last decade. Please share with me what you are doing to help.

You can put forth all of the propaganda you want on Natural Gas. It is becoming a big problem. Just do your homework. And no I have never been a big fan of any carbon or nuclear energy.

Fact is there are levels of pollution when you talsk about the carbon energy and coal is the worst and natural gas was the best until the greedy bastards and Haliburton decided, screw the environment, fracking would be a good way to make a ton of money. Have you seen the movies “Gasland” and “Split Estate”?

I am for clean alternative renewables and we should have a Manhattan project to develop all of them now before it’s too late. We should lead!

I realize many of you will need to be dragged away from the carbon tit kicking and screaming like the babies you are, but the costs of the destruction from carbon energy will dwarf the cost of switching to renewables.

Don’t be a fool Dave the Progressive agenda is not about control it’s about suggesting solutions, modeling excellence, and doing the right thing. People and the environment first and profits will follow.

What’s your model?

Eric says the Progressive Agenda is not about Control. Then why, Eric, do the Progressives always enlist the Force of Government to further their agendas? Do you really think intelligent people can buy into your equivocations?
You need to go back to DailyKos or some other such site where Emotion substitutes for logic.

You silly boy, accusing some one of trying to promote their own agenda, you need to realize you promote tour agenda all the time.

Eric says “I can always count on you Dave to negate everything I put forth and name calling”.
Oh yeah, the big name-caller, Me.
Here are some manipulative gems that came from two comments by Eric just today:
“So grasping for the last dirtiest of all tar sand oil is pretty stupid”.
“all you people can think about is how to force people to bring more unwanted kids into this big mess and not teach family planning and contraception. Brilliant!”.
“I know just the word socialism makes some of you go stupid”.
“Denial is not an intelligent or acceptable stance”.
“Inequality and greed is exactly why we have Occupy movements and revolutions all over the world”.
“They are merely more evolved and enlightened”.
“I realize many of you will need to be dragged away from the carbon tit kicking and screaming like the babies you are”.
“Don’t be a fool Dave”.

This folks is what we can expect if we’re foolish enough to let the Progressives get any more power. They are pushy controlling people who think they know what’s best for us. They don’t.

Thanks Dave…and that is why he is affectionately called “Eric the Red”!

DaveH –

Agreed. Progressives (as all totalitarians do) need a crisis mentality to push the agenda du jour forward. I always love the vague references to “experts know” and “studies have proven”.

Yes Sol it’s probably best to just solely rely on faith!

Eric –

My experience in some of these matters are first hand and not based on what someone (remotely?) reasoned and wrote. I put more “faith” in the study of ecology (science based) than environmentalism (which is a politically based “field of study”).

Most people have not worked in the oil fields or studied oil recovery methods or their effects. I studied several recovery methods in graduate school including some tertiary methods like in-situ combustion. I have worked in oil fields and I can testify that honorable producers take the environmental aspects of their work very seriously, and act responsibly.

Yours was a very broad-brush rant, and I have to state that I have found the progressive agenda to be very statist and totalitarian. It is ALL about how to control populist behavior and why such encroachment on personal liberty is justified. Th justification often cites experts who have researched remotely and never set foot in the field or have dubious methods. Peer review is often a guarantee of reliable results because the peer review process is often co-opted for political purpose.

Such expert advice must be treated with reasonable skepticism.
“Experts” are not Gods. They are often wrong presenting opinions as facts or proofs or “truths”.

My professors who taught mathematical logic used to joke as to why Jesus could not answer Pilate’s question “what is truth”. It is because there is no answer. However, if Pilate had asked “what is truth ‘under interpretation’” Jesus could have provided a thorough description based on three mathematical axioms.

It is important for people to understand the concept of truth under interpretation. It is important because it applies not only to people embracing religious dogma, but also to those who treat science as religious dogma.

I look forward to your thoughts.

Oops. I mean to say: Peer review is NOT reliable because it is often co-opted for political purpose.

Have you noticed, Sol, the dearth of references in Eric’s comments?
I find it almost laughable that the Liberals, who post on this board, expect us to just take their words as gospel (speaking of Religion).
I am an honest man (not many Liberals can lay claim to that), and still I don’t expect people to just take my word for anything. If I take a stand on an issue, I can almost always back it up with references, and often do even when I haven’t been challenged.
Take the word of a Liberal? Never.

Eric says “My professors who taught mathematical logic”.
Apparently it didn’t sink in, because the bodies of Socialistic countries have littered history. Actual experience shows that Big Government DOESN’T work:
http://www.freetheworld.com/2011/reports/world/EFW2011_complete.pdf

Still the Progressives cling to their Hopeful agendas of Force.

Dave
I realize it’s based on science but just because you are too lazy to do your own research does not mean it’s not happening. Just look it up.

There is a pattern here. No come back on Nuclear being a problem so you turn back to name calling and fear mongering of things you know nothing about and are too scared to try and understand.

Well Dave we have Capitalism and even the Chinese are practicing it. How is it working so far? How do you explain the acceleration of bubbles? How do you explain the massive inequality if it’s such a great system in it’s present form? How do you explain inflation, hyperinflation? Who are you going to blame for all of these things?

Oh I know it’s not the systems that maybe are not optimal and failing us, it’s the Liberals and progressives fault! Or it’s the communists or the Democrats or Republicans.

I am sorry but the systems are not good enough and we can do better. You can forever try to hold on to models that don’t work and are massively failing society but that only delays the inevitable. The only thing this model is good for right now is making a few in the status quo ruling class richer than ever at the expense of everyone else. And many of you want to hold on to these systems because like the dream of winning the lottery you don’t want to change it because you believe that you could the 1%.

Eric,
Anybody, who reads your comments and reads mine, can clearly see who is using logic, and who is using manipulative tactics. You can fool yourself. You can maybe even fool some Liberals on this board. But you can’t fool the intelligent people here.

Eric said: Well Dave we have Capitalism and even the Chinese are practicing it. How is it working so far? How do you explain the acceleration of bubbles? How do you explain the massive inequality if it’s such a great system in it’s present form? How do you explain inflation, hyperinflation? Who are you going to blame for all of these things?

Unfortunately Eric, you are confusing capitalism with criminal behaviour. You ask for clarification concerning the above criminal enterprises, the short answer; extremely low morals, and a serious deficiency, or, the absence of sound character. Another words, its a character issue, not an issue related to capitalism. To suggest otherwise, is to conveniently circumvent, or deflect blame, where blame belongs; at the feet of the ones who engage in such nefarious behaviour, and not, at the feet of Capitalism!

To Sol of Texas:
These predictions were made by business weekly along with the Wall street journal. Granted, both these sources have strong gov. biases but when coming to business growth quite accurate. Google them and you can see this prediction/report. Thanks!!

To Clarence Swinney:
Excellent post!! Hey, i got a question. You mentioned that 500 workers were layed off in that Miss. town in order to open a larger plant. Were those 500 workers rehired to work in that new plant along with the manager? Just curious, thanks!!

Shy,
There is No such thing as a “FEDERAL GOVERNMENT,” thus you have exposed that you have no clue what your talking about.

There is a group of “Sub Contractors” for the UNITED STATES INC.
But they as well as the Corporation known as the UNITED STATES INC are not a Government by law they are a “Defacto” format.

Real Capitalism is as utopian as communism and socialism are. People cry about capitalism and the “”free market”" and forget all about that capitalism just as communism and socialism only works in the absence of criminal greed. Greed is what has destroyed the feeble attempts of a capitalist society in the US and has brought us where we are.
Greed just as sugar and salt is good in small quantities, too much will cause illness and death.
Greed is needed as a motivator to succeed, but too much greed is where the destruction of a society comes from. A little greed is the main driver and motivator for capitalism, too much greed will turn it into crony capitalism and fascism / socialism or an unhealthy mix of……just like it happened in the US. Unfortunately, as much as we would love to, we can NOT control greed and thus capitalism and self regulated free markets are as utopian as communism and socialism.
I predict the future will turn out to be a healthy mix of all of them.

Having a perfectly happy life is not achievable, John. Does that mean you won’t make an effort to achieve that?

Greed, John, is what makes people lust after the lawfully acquired money of others.

And it is the same greed that makes people lust to enslave others… greed in small doses is healthy, unchecked greed is destructive.

Yes, the left’s greed and envy does prefer to enslave others.

Very well put, thank you

Really? How so? I suspect John may have revealed more about himself, than he may have wanted. He exhausts himself decrying the evil nature of man, not much else, i’m afraid! He advocates for the creation of a vacuum, removing all isms, but offers no suggestions for their replacement. Well stated? Grammatically perhaps.

Trouble is Dave that everybody wants speending for them not anyone else.
Pure captailism is a global eneterprise it transends the nation state indeed makes it irrlevent. Although it is already happening, I suspect from your previous posts and most of your fellow right wingers on here dont want this.
No farm subsidies, no artificial restrictions on employment and relocation, no government bail-outs, no chapter 11 bankruptcy, no infrastructure spending, no safety oversight etc., no subsidized social security and in the end no state military spending.
I am a progressive, globalist I’m all for it but are you?

No Chapter 11 bankruptcy? Exactly how would you determine the distribution of failed companies’ assets to the claimants without such proceedings?
Progressives can only succeed in an environment of Force, because people will not willingly put their life-choices in the hands of Self-Serving Leaders.

Dave just showing your ignorance again. I guess you can’t help it. Chapter 11 is about reorganizing the company. It gives the pricipals the chance to screw the creditors yet again. Chapter 7 is a total liquidation of the assets to the creditors without a bank coming in and giving debtor in posession financing and pushing the bond holders further back in the repayment queue.

I saw him say tht on TV. Unbelievable that a candidate can be so dumb! He keeps sticking his foot in his mouth!
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/mitt-romney-350-000-a-buy-article-1.1008049

fix the “Flawed Free Enterprise System “so that people with high level political contacts cannot “legally plunder” the free enterprise system. People who do not have connections with the government and banking systems do not have the same opportunities as Mitt Romney.

Romney’s 25-year so called work record and his bank accounts inc luding so wealthy he send sfunds offshore and until recently those funds were “secret” so Romney will do nothing but continue to drive the United States off the cliff with his crony capitalism and love for transferring the money from the
pockets of the hardworking people of this country and lining his coffers!’
Message needs to be clearly and succinctly articulated to the people of this country that the “Free Enterprise System” is so “FLAWED” that People with connections from birth like Mitt Romney spend their entire lifetime using legal plunder to enrich themselves. See below for idea.
“When Newt Gingrich told Romney if it had not been for the Federal Government’s (regulations or changes in law) he would far less wealthy, and Mitt commented “I certainly didn’t sit around and wait for the Federal Government to help me,” I wanted the” Federal Government” to get out of my way so I could create jobs. This was a “bold face” lie. Newt Gingrich told the truth. Mitt Romney has enriched himself financially with the “Flawed Free Enterprise System” that has been designed and re-designed to enrich the elite. Romney is the poor rich kid who praises his ability to “plunderer the financial system and he does it legally because the politicians have changed laws and regulations to help people just like Romney – not the working class!”

You are absolutely right. No matter what they say about Clinton, he knew how to get this country to work. Bush destroyed everything this country had going in just a few months. This is what tea partiers are about. You tea party people keep on supporting the greedy and see where it leads us.

-CLINTON PRAISE-WITH PLEASURE
GDP–rose from 6300 to 11,600
NATIONAL INCOME-5,000 to 8,000 Billion–took 20 years to grow 2500B before Clinton
JOBS CREATED–over 22 million–record by far—record 237,000 net new jobs per month. Bush followed with 31,000 lowest since Hoover.
AVERAGE WEEKLY EARNINGS–$360 to $478
AVERAGE WEEKLY HOURS WORKED–never hit 35.0–hit that  mark 4 times in 80′s
UNEMPLOYMENT–from 7.2% down down down to 3.9%
WELFARE TO WORK—11,533,710 on federal roll in 1996 and 3,880,321 in 2007.
MINIMUM WAGE–$4.25 to $5.15
MINORITIES–did exceedingly well-His increase in Earned Income Tx Credit lifted millions of low income adults and families out of poverty annually.
Clinton philosophy“If you work hard, play by the rules, you ought to be able to live a decent life”.Thanks Jesus.
HOME OWNERSHIP–hit all time high
DEFICIT–290 Billion to whoopee a SURPLUS
DEBT—-+30%—300% increase over prior 12 years
FEDERAL SPENDING–+28%—80% under Reagan- who da true conservative?
DOW JONES AVERAGE–3,500 to 11,800  all it’s history to get to 3500 and Clinton zooms it
NASDAQ–700 to 5,000—all of it’s history to get to 700 and Clinton zooms it
VALUES INDEXES– almost all bad went down–good went up in zoom zoom zoom
FOREIGN AFFAIRS–Peace on Earth good will toward each other—Mark of a true Christian–what has Bush done to Peace on Earth?
POPULARITY—highest poll ratings  in history during peacetime in  AFRICA, ASIA AND EUROPE even 98.5% in Moscow–left office with highest gallup rating since it was started in 1920′s.
STAND UP FOR JUSTICE–evil conservatives spent $110,000,000 on hearings and investigations and caught— ONE— very evil man who took a few plane rides to events.
BOW YOUR HEADS–Thank you God for sending us a man of Bill Clinton’s character, intelligence, knowledge of governance, ability to face up to crises without whimpering and a great leader of the world.
THANK YOU GOD FOR THE GOOD TIMES THE CLINTON YEARS.

So many Propagandized People, so little time:
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5656

Clinton was just a much slyer version of Obama. He would have assumed dictatorship if he could have gotten away with it.
One example of abuse under the Clinton regime:
https://www.cato.org/dailys/08-21-02-2.html

Here’s another example:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa395.pdf

NC –

I want to know what prescription medications you were taking in the 90′s ’cause I’m sure I’ll need some.

How did Clinton create the jobs? The ship was running itself. Thankfully, not too much damage was done by Clinton because the executive and legislative branches were divided. It could have been much worse.

I’ve had several opportunities to hear Clinton speak in person. I voted with my feet and walked away.

I will never understand the Clinton allure. I don’t find him charming. I find him duplicitous. Like the late Paul Tsongas suggested … if you want to vote for Santa Claus, vote for a guy like Bill Clinton (implication — both are mythical, neither is a real person). I smoked marijuana but I never inhaled? What the hell does that even mean?

What you need Sol might not come in a medicine bottle but from lying on a couch dealing with your denial that there are millions of people smarter than you with different opinions! What “form” of government available to us under our Constitution has done a better job than Slick Willy did? We lost no wars, had no major terrorist attacks and average American was better off financially when he left. He beat bush I for the job in a fair election and then “smoked” bushI’s economic figures TWICE! If he inhaled then give me a toke! As the young folks say “that was some good s**t”!! See “Prosperity and the Presidents” at Forbes .com!!!

He had a Republican congress.

No kidding…..

Trade embargoes only hurt those who we should be helping — the common citizens. And they sure don’t endear the US to those people who are suffering. The best we could do is to butt out of other countries’ business and let them seek their own solutions. If they’re unhappy enough, they will rebel, as it should be. Hopefully, their rebellion leads to wise Government like we had for a short time in our history.
For more:
http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=341

Brian,

A BIG – DITTO on your post!

If Dr. Ron Paul fails to get in, we will be moving out of the US.

And which country would you choose to go to? Just curious…which country would make a good choice…

I love Chile, Libertytrain. It’s got the geographic location of California (on opposite side of Equator), but it has Freer Markets than California. Chile, believe it or not, is now ranked ahead of the United States in Economic Freedom, and actually moving up the scale instead of down like the US is doing:
http://heritage.org/index/ranking
Who would have ever thought that a South American country would become Freer than the US? Thanks a lot, Progressives.
To see how any individual country got its ranking, just pick the country name.

LT,

There are many differant areas we have on the list.
Here is a really good question; Don’t we all find it very strange that people like the Clinton’s, Bush’s, Gore, even Barry and Soro’s, and oddly even the Rothschild’s have bought homes and land in Paraguay and Uruguray????????
There is a good reason, they fear that they may fail with their NWO plan.

But as far as nations that are much more “Free” than we are, here are a few in South America – by the way a few hundred Thousand will make for a long care free life with everything you could ever want, or need.
*Chile, **Ecquador, *****Bolivia, *Preu, *Argentina.

As well there are many Island’s in the South Pacific that are really NICE!
One can live there for little money if you can live with a sandy beach that you can walk in your bare feet all the time, lots of sun shine, a few storms per year, lots of fresh fruits, fish and veggies.
Many of these don’t have TV nor movies, and in some case’s roads, other than in the citys etc. but then again do we really need them to be happy?

Dave, TIME – I’ve never been interested in South American countries. I suppose that is my loss. I think you may be onto something TIME with the Pacific Islands. I do like rural. I’m not big on Tropics, but I guess I’d make do… And, Tahiti has a romantic feel to it… i.e. Gauguin seemed to enjoy his time there, although his life in general seemed to have really kind of sucked. I guess I could make do anywhere. I like the adventure of change.

Dave – I checked the list – of the top ten the first two are not of interest to me. However, Australia and particularly New Zealand would work for me.

LT, & Dave

Always check where ever you may look into to see if they are following UCC law.
Keep in mind that UCC Law is what we do here in the US INC…
Oh and UCC Law is another part of what got us into this whole mess in the first place.
Thats why we follow Maritime Law. If you google – Bill Foust’s youtube feeds you will find a TON of INTEL on this topic, as well as everything else I keep posting on the Defacto US INC..

Let me be blunt, I used to think I had a clue, only to find I had to empty my cup and start all over.
BUT – I thank GOD I did I have learned so much in the last 8 months, my head is about to explode. And just for the record – the TRUTH is a very hard pill to swollow, but if you do, you will never see anything the same ever again.

Its really all CODES by way of symbol’s and Iconography.
Think Hitler and the Sun Wheel.
Now really look at Barry’s 2008 posters what can you find straight off?

What the real UNITED STATES Flag looks like shook me to the core.
And yet 99.9999% of the population of America thinks its the old stars and stripes, not quite.

Check out the flag of the CITY STATE, called the “DISTRICT of COLUMBIA.” Note three stars, for 3 CITY STATES, one the Money City State, London on top. Left lower DISTRICT of COLUMBIA the Military City State, the lower Right, is VATICAN CITY, the Land of SPRIT.
The underside has two steel rails in Blood Red, the “ROYAL BLOOD LINES.”
Now keep in mind that as I have said many times now, 43 of the 44 POTUS are BLOOD RELATED, and to whom are they related?

Creditors always get stiffed in bankruptcies that the nature of the game, it is no ones fault but the companies.

Here, HEAR!

Free unregulated markets will end up turning into monopolies. Monopolies breed more monopolies and thus your innovative entrepreneur has no way to make it anywhere. You can’t do anything, without raw materials that will be controlled by monopolies. A true free market will in the end result in the same problem we have right now, a few who got in on the monopolies at the start will control everything and the rest will be consumer slaves…that in theory have all venues open to them but in reality are screwed. Pure capitalism just as pure communism and socialism is bound to fail…because of a simple human trait….. its called greed. And so, societies who are capitalist will start….gasp… controlling the monopolies through government regulations…turning …gasp into crony capitalists and into socialists or even into fascists. Just look into our own history and you can see…its all there for the people with open minds to examine.

How can you come to this conclusion since a true FREE enterprise capitalist system has never existed on this planet? Just as there has never been a civilization on this planet. Men (especially those in government organizations) would rather use force, coercion, and fraud to take what someone else has produced rather than produce something themselves of tradeable value in a FREE enterprise capitalist system.

Initial premise flawed. EPIC FAIL!!

No monopoly can exist without the support and assistance of the state, based upon a basic capitalist maxim which has NEVER been proven
wrong in any environment even approximating a free market,and CANNOT be proven wrong in any other, namely:

“Excess profits breed ruinous competition.”

Those of you spouting opinions regarding capitalism would do well to read and study Ayn Rand’s many books about the subject, as nobody ever did a better job of defining true capitalism and justifying it.

Understanding that reading is unpopular today, as it requires a bit of effort to study and comprehend any subject, an alternative recommendation is to visit youtube and watch all of Milton Friedman’s videos you can find. It will be like diluted tea compared to Rand’s justifications, but you might at least learn to keep your mouths shut about a subject of which you know so little.

Better yet, study at mises.org.

Ayn Rand? She did not do very well with her ideas even capitalists thought where off the deep end. Ayn Rand was a disillusioned ex communist who went to the opposite extreme. And in the end, after she blew all the money from her book sales to the sheep and from her speaking assignments ….she drew all her convictions over board and went back to socialism again…. after she blew all her money she ended up living on……gasp….welfare for years til she died.
Ayn Rand eh? you might as well quote the books of the brothers Grim.

Moreover a few facts about your heroine:
Rand called her philosophy “Objectivism”,not capitalism as many today call it, describing its essence as “the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.”[86] She considered Objectivism a systematic philosophy and laid out positions on metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, political philosophy and esthetics.[87]
In metaphysics, Rand supported philosophical realism and atheism, and opposed anything she regarded as mysticism or supernaturalism, including all forms of religion.[88]

Clarence –

I don’t think a Bush vs Clinton argument (neo-cons vs. progressives) is going to buy much on a liberty oriented blog like this.

And the democrat controlled congress from 2006 to Obama, a part of that congress when he did not vote “Not Present” was just an innocent bystander too. Way to go, Debbie S.

DITTO!

ANOTHER DITTO!

I’m not so sure that is true ! Me thinks we need more than justt someone that is good with finances. Check out the world around us and see just what else a president needs at his disposal at this point in time. It is more than just a knowlege o finance ! That is one of the things he needs but not the only thing !

Karolyn, I just read that some Republicans have said Perry will drop out very soon. Another deal to defeat Romney! It appears that a candidate who can beat Romeny for the nomination will have to make so may deals with other candidates that if that person gets elected he will be the first President with 8 vice presidents.If the stakes weren’t so high that would be fun to watch!

Hey there are other desirable post to be offered you know. They will all be scrambling for something just as soon as the news media selects the guy to run. The news media is the reason why we end up every time voting for the lesser of two evils ! They will try to pick who they think will give Obama the chance to win. Don’t fall for it. You vote for who you know can defeat Obama. They all seeem to have basically the same qualifications so choose the guy who can take on the bad guy and win if you want to close the door on socialism. In the debates ask the hard questions and get them to commit on the record. Then hold their feet to the fire. You are not going to find anything new in this years bag of politicians so assest the real dangers and then choose the best fighter ! Don’t look for saints in politics, they don’t exist no matter what their name is and what they tell you. There ain’t no such animal !

Romney Care or Obama care would have not been so bad if the healthcare and insurance cos had not lobbied so hard against medicare for evreyone . Already the goverenment pays over 50 percent of all healthcare costs . while the insurance co are robbing the other private health care consumers , with phoney bills and crazy over charges . The health care industry has a lucrative position and they want to keep raising prices . eventually they will take all the money .leaving nothing for the other costs of living . The government has given a lot of special little monopolies to several groupes ,they all have been raising their take faster than we can afford to pay them .

When they (GOP)were running they sure proved you wrong, we are paying dearly for that now

They kill the messenger here if they don’t like the message. Rather then debate the issues they resort to slander and name calling (ouch!). That really hurt!

It was to no good end Captain Ahab persuaded the great white whale. To what degree do we peruse these notions of absolutes and unwilling to accept homogenized blends of both, as we all agree, the very nature of man can not be taken out of the equation.

Venture capitalism is an economic construct of thought and not a form of government.

Socialism, is many things wide and broad, plenty of room for both good and evil.

What is Venture Capitalism, Deer?

Perhaps that’s a good place to start Davy, with ones own perception.

But that I am left of you Dav in & of it’s self does not qualify me as a liberal but only in your eyes. For I’ve enjoyed close friends over the year that by your same standards and application would make you a liberal as well.

Off the cuff, something I seem noted for, Venture capitalism is an economic construct of thought. How to create personal gains using investment and market forces, using whatever is available and at your disposal to secure and capture earning from investment. The “venture” is in that it is an adventure and the outcome not always certain and losses possible. These potential loses can be managed with many instruments and strategics, legally and maybe not, morally or maybe not.

We can use existing market or create new markets to apply venture capitalism. You only need a demand and a supply.

Old man Rockefeller, the founder of Standard Oil facing stiff completion decided one day to go into the barrel manufacturing business and cornered the barrel market. This allowed him serious “consideration” from his competitors, offer us a text book case of market forces and cause and effect.

Any notion of social “morals” is not required in venture capitalism and truly optional. . While a win/win situation might work best in the long view, it is not required.

You might wish to offer free a virus, creating a market and sell the cure. You might traffic in human suffering but supply and demand forces still apply.

Okay, ~ I’ve offered my spin and I must go for now.

Notice how Deerinwater, like most Liberals, immediately goes for the personal attack of calling me “Davy” as if I am inferior to him.
And anybody, Deer, Democrat or Republican, who advocates Big Government as the Solution IS a Liberal.
Deer says “Venture capitalism is an economic construct of thought”.
Oh, swoon, I’m so impressed by your phraseology, NOT.
Venture Capitalists are simply those people who offer startup money to entrepreneurs who don’t have the capital necessary to launch their own businesses successfully. The Venture Capitalist usually takes some level of ownership in the new company, and will win if the new business succeeds, or lose if it doesn’t. So, of course, the Venture Capitalist must choose wisely which companies he (or they usually) invests in. Venture Capitalists are simply a subset of Capitalists.

You have proven to me, Deer, and anybody else who knows anything about economics, that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Well, I am sorry that you took it that way David, it was not intended. But your biting responses is most typical of the huffing and puffing highly offend-able far right.

I find your explanation rather weak David as you attempted to explain to all of us who venture capitalist are as appose to answering your own question, “what is venture capitalism?”

And then too, are you suggest that they can not be the money man and the entrepreneurial agent. And what does it matter, “who”?

Or maybe you should have worded you question better, while I knew I was walking into a trap to answer your question, I was hoping for a more enlightened response.

Are we attempting to discuss Crime or Criminals? One being the “actor” while the other being a “behavior”

For a guy that does not know anything about business or venture capitalism, I’ve fared rather well in spite of government, in spite of hard times, in spite of never kissing the ring and accept a sugar daddy and his bank roll for a very long time.

I invest both time and money everyday and still have time and enjoy bantering with all of you.

David, you can’t offend me. It’s for me to allow and quite simply put, I refuse. ☺ “Offence” is a personal choice that you “elect to make”. Maybe someday, I hope that you learn that one thing if nothing else.

I owe much of my success to people like yourself that think that they know something and got in over their head and up to their hips in trouble.

If you really want to know how Bain works, the Boston Globe did a thorough expose on an office supply company named Ampad, a 1990′s Bain Capital investment the ended in bankruptcy. The story is repeated by Dana D. Kelley, in a commentary published in the Jan. 20, 2012, edition of the Arkansas Democrat Gazette. It wasn’t a failure for Bain – they made $21-mil off a $5-mil investment. For Mitt and Bain it was a get-rich-quick fortune-making success. For the employees, communities, shareholders, banks, creditors, it was devastating.

What Mitt and Bain do may be legal, but is it right? Yes, it is a FORM of capitalism, albeit, as far as I am concerned, a shameful form. He is the Richard Gere in Pretty Woman who reforms and wants to “build something that lasts” instead of destroy it for profit. Unfortunately, Mitt is still defending it because he got out with his millions and living high at the expense of thousands of people he put out of work using questionable practices.

His brand of Capitalism is not the kind that made this country great. It is the kind that leaves chinks in the soul of our country and gives the Capitalism a bad name throughout the world.

Lastly, great Americans such as our founders teach us to live by our head and be guided by our heart. What Mitt does requires a shutdown of the heart, and I’ll have to say that I would not want that kind of person making decisions about Social Security and Medicare which, incidentally, are not “entitlements” and should never be categorized with Medicaid – those have been bought and paid for out of our salaries, but, unfortunately, Washington spent the money and is trying to brainwash the rest of us by lumping them in with freebie government giveaways. Rick Perry was right when he called Bain “vulture capitalism.” Vote Newt Gingrich!!!

(Incidentally, you might purchase the “Rediscovering God in America” DVD’s from the America Family Association and listen to Newt’s speech walking the pastors through the Washington monuments and showing how they point out the faith and Christian beliefs held by the person they are portraying, as well as Rev. Hagee’s who is trying to turn the pulpit back to teaching the Bible instead of giving in to political correctness, and who Newt follows. He and Celesta also published a book by the same name.) Newt’s suggestions on the DVD are profound and our country would do well if everyone could hear them.

Socialists do need earners to create the wealth (Capitalism), so they can take and redistribute.

You seem to suggest that subscribing to any degree of socialist prohibits one from being an “EARNER” .

Could you elaborate how you came to such a conclusion? Clearly not everyone is an “earner” regardless of “label” or affiliation.

Mitt Romney is an “earner” , he uses other people money to make him money. He uses other people’s position to craft them misfortune to become his “earning”. So is he too a true “earner” and entitle your respect and support?

Deer, you seriously need to read this book. Pick up a copy at your local library, or buy one:
http://www.amazon.com/How-Capitalism-Saved-America-Pilgrims/dp/1400083311/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1326985485&sr=8-1

Be the first Liberal on your block to learn some reality, Deer.
Why anybody (except the Leaders and their Cronies) would prefer the Force of Government (Socialism) over the voluntary trading in Free Markets is a mystery to me.

Dave
He is so set in his ways that it doesn’t matter what he reads he will never see the light !

Chances are Granny that he wouldn’t read it. Liberals are scared to death that they might have to face the fact that they’ve been spreading manure for years.
Usually when I paste a link I am doing it for the other readers who aren’t so prideful and want to learn.

Bob Wire/Deerinheadlights says, “Mitt Romney is an “earner” , he uses other people money to make him money. He uses other people’s position to craft them misfortune to become his “earning”. So is he too a true “earner” and entitle your respect and support?”

Don’t like the use of other people’s money to obtain something of value, Bob? Better pay off all your credit cards, auto loan, mortgage, business loans, etc., because you are using someone else’s money. Oh yeah, pull your kids out of school, too, since it takes other people’s money to educate them.

Capitalism is about using your own resources to achieve an end, and that’s always about taking someone else’s money. That someone else is ready and willing to give you the money to get what they want.

Socialism is about the government stealing your money to give to someone else, and that someone else is ready and willing to take that money to get what they want.

“Don’t like the use of other people’s money to obtain something of value, Bob? Better pay off all your credit cards, auto loan, mortgage, business loans, etc., because you are using someone else’s money. Oh yeah, pull your kids out of school, too, since it takes other people’s money to educate them.”

No Sir, I don’t like that, not for myself leastwise. Using common fund for a common good can been seen as necessary and acceptable, our government depends on it. What we have here is a creditably and confidence problem due to violations of the public trust.

So we blame this failure of confidence on everyone that “offended” and do not agree with us , while blaming ourselves last and least. I have just described the “GOP” and 85% of GOP supporters and 50% of the rank and file DNC.

and I have no credit cards, no bank notes, and pay taxes on what I own & earn. I have no debit, unless water and electric counts.

and granny, I have no fear, of anything , fear is not a motivating force in my personal life. What I don’t know, what I do know, I fear neither and sorry that you might or feel that I should.

Fear paralyses the brain and dulls all but two human senses , fight and flight. If you think that is wrong or inaccurate, please look it up.

“DaveH says:
January 19, 2012 at 9:08 am
Deer, you seriously need to read this book. Pick up a copy at your local library, or buy one:
http://www.amazon.com/How-Capitalism-Saved-America-Pilgrims/dp/1400083311/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1326985485&sr=8-1”

David , I read to page 50 and speed read some 40 more pages.

I’m at a loss for words, and not sure what to say to you.

It read like something that I might written myself, both in content and context on about a freshman level.

I’ve always had the suspicion , that you see conflict where there is “none”. That pretty well convinced me that I’ve been correct about you.

Needless to say, I’m sure I missed some of the finer nuances and detail with my speed but I found no conflict in what was presented and my understanding of capitalism and how it works and all of the many pitfalls.

You must really think I’m dumb or you overvalue yourself.

Let me say this, I know my limits and when to seek out the help I need. Okay?

Do you?

… and sadly, we HAVE an American form of SOCIALISM whose proponents want us to gravitate toward European socialism of 1920 – 1990. It fills me with fear because I don’t want to live like that.

Sol of Texas,
I agree with you. Socialism was tried in this country by the Pilgrim fathers of Plymouth Colony. They established a sort of communist system. They all farmed together and what they grew they put in a common store house. There was a certain amount of food rationed out to each person regardless of his contribution to the work. Many Pilgrims complaine that they were too weak from hunger to do their share of the work. Even though they were deeply religious they took to stealing from one another. It became clear that if they didn’t change things , they would surely starve again the next year. So they after much debate , they set up a new system, by which every family was assigned a parcel of land, and whatever they produced belonged to that family. Now the people went willingly into the fields. The harvest was so bountiful that they were credited with establishing Thanksgiving. When you work for your own good you are willing to put more of yourself into what you do and you come away with more than you would if you just excepted what the government offered you plus you have a renewd self esteme to do more and become even wealthier than you ever were before. In a socialist society you don’t really bring others up to your level, you bring yourself down to the level of the poorest. Water seeks it’s own level !

What is a Libertarian?
http://mises.org/rothbard/foranewlb.pdf

“Please read the 1871 District of Columbia Act and prove it to yourself.”

I’ve read it twice, and find ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to substantiate what you say. It was, plainly and simply, a municipal incorporation like thousands of US communities have done. The District of Columbia was incorporated, NOT the United States of America.

You need to get away from the Team Law website and actually read the Act, which I tend to believe you haven’t. But in the remote chance that you have, kindly quote to me ANYTHING in the Act that backs you up. You won’t find it.

Dude your not very bright are you?

So let me make this very easy for you to grasp, Can you spell {GOOGLE.}
Now use the word GOOGLE on your search bar, now thats up, now place the following in the search bar, are you with me still?
Place in the box – Bill Foust, still with me?

Now its your choice you can either take the TRUTH pill or just go back to sleep.

NOW hit enter, when the little pictures come up so to the hard choice, you can play dumb if you so wish, or you can hit the YOUTUBE feed for Bill Foust.
You want to start with his youtube feed;
District of Columbia Act of 1871 Defacto part 1 – 3 now how easy is that?????????
Oh he also shows all the Doucments that SUSTAIN everything I have said. Your choice again wake up or just stay sleeping.

If you so wish to take the trip to TRUTH, good – but again first EMPTY your cup.

Then all you have to do is sit back and let Bill who by the way was a Judge explain it to you in an easy to follow method.
Its almost like sleep learning. Your choice, go back to sleep or wake the hell up.

Oh and get yourself a Blacks law book if you so wish to wake up. Learn what the words really mean, then ask me questions.
But until then I am not your MOMMIE I will not hold your hand.
BTW – Niether will the FEMA MERKS when they come to take you to camp FEMA.

As expected, you couldn’t quote ONE THING in the Act that backs you up.

Would you like me to hold your hand while you READ the Act?

To parody your quote, “your choice again read the Act or just stay sleeping.”

Announcement of Foust’s murder prefaced by:

The Republic for the united States of America
From the Desk of the Chief Ambassador
RuSA Verification #: RP208703120RuSA
Monday, June 20, 2011
Regarding: William Dale Foust
To My Fellow Americans, etc., etc.

Consider my part in this conversation closed. I do not spar with the mentally challnged.

…make that “challenged.”

In Pure Socialism, the Government owns all the means of Production. But usually Socialism is perceived to be varying levels of Government involvement in the Economy.

How much is enough
10% own 73% net wealth–80% own 15%
10% own 83% financial wealth–80% own 7%
50% get 90% indivdual income
70,000,000, workers get 10%

73/15 83/7 90/10 Mexico? Close. Open thine eyes.

International studies reveal that Happiness in the people is in a direct proportion to Equality in distribution of wealth.

Marchers? Unhappy that in oecd nations we rank
4th on Inequality
3rd on Least Taxed
2nd on Least taxed corporations

How much is enough?

Clarence: I’m not sure but I believe that you are in favor of wealth redistribution? It doesn’t work as the average person has no idea of how to handle wealth. It doesn’t take long before ignorance and greed returns the redistributed wealth to just a few hands which is in essence wealth redistribution itself. .

The answer to how much is enough, Clarence, depends largely on whether they are Market Entrepreneurs who made their money satisfying customers, or whether they are Political Entrepreneurs who make their money by aiding their Crony Politicians’ re-elections who then in turn give them special protections from Marketplace competition, whether through subsidies, tariffs, quotas, or targeted regulations. In such cases the Crony Capitalists succeed at the expense of their competitors, their customers, and the taxpayers.
That’s why we need to get Government out of our Marketplace, like our Freedom Loving Founders intended.

That’s true for Socialism and Communism, Jimmy, but not true for Capitalism. Real Capitalism is simply rigidly enforced property rights, protection from Fraud and Force, and otherwise an absence of Government in the Marketplace. In other words Free Markets. With Free Markets, anybody with ambition and skill can succeed. With Free Markets there would be NO Crony Capitalism. The consumers would be King rather than a bunch of self-interested Politicians.
For those who want to better understand:
http://mises.org/books/capitalism_kelly.pdf

True capitalism is as much a fiction as true socialism or true communism.

All of them fail because of one simple concept, human nature…. also called greed. As long as humans can not prevent greed, all of them in their pure form are prone to failure.

I.M.H.O. what will survive and be the universal form of government in the future is a mix of capitalism and socialism. Unless someone will come up with a new “ism” that will work. But it will be neither pure capitalism nor pure socialism.

Who actually expects utopia on earth? Only the ignorant or psychologically disturbed. However, if the Enlightenment taught us anything worth holding onto it would be that people must be free to make choices and live with the consequences, and for collective issues, persuasion must be employed. True capitalists embrace this belief. Totalitarians (crony-capitalists, socialists, communists, fascists, progressives, etc …) believe “experts” have the answers to life’s problems, all “smart experts” agree, and coercion is needed so that people behave in “their own and everyone’s best interest”.

If that is not “the truth”, it is at least a fact!

Capitalism has never failed, John. It has only been perverted by evil people in high positions. When left alone by Government, except to protect people from Force or Fraud, Capitalism far exceeds the benefits of any other system.
Don’t confuse Mercantilism with Capitalism, John. And while it is difficult indeed to keep Capitalism, due to the subversive nature of Leaders and their Crony Capitalists, and the Ignorance of the masses, we should never quit trying to keep it Pure.
I will re-post this link for convenience:
http://mises.org/books/capitalism_kelly.pdf
You should read it, John, with an open mind. I suspect that you harbor a lot of misconceptions. We all have been severely Propagandized by those who want to subjugate us.

“Capitalism has never failed, John. It has only been perverted by evil people in high positions.”

So are you suggesting that you know a place where there is no “evil” people David?

I believe that you could replace the word “capitalism” and insert any word of your choice and your statement would be accurate.

As I’ve explained many times before, Deer, Reagan was a victim of a Big Government Loving Congress. He vetoed 78 spending bills; more than any President since Eisenhower. But unlike Obama, Reagan was Constitutional enough to not override Congress and do as he damn well pleased, so he couldn’t stop their wild Spending Spree. And about a year after he got in office, Reagan gave in to his own Big Government party members who kept whining to him that he needed to “Compromise”. Now where have I heard that word before? No, he didn’t need to Compromise, he needed to stick to his Principles and leave it to Congress to screw the American citizens (as usual).
Here is Reagan’s Inaugural Address. If only he had stuck to his guns:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpPt7xGx4Xo

Reagan submitted 8 budgets that totaled over 7000B.
1930-1980 we spent 6066B. Wow! More in 8 than in 50!

Blame Congress? Ha!
Congress returned his 8 budgets to him with fewer dollars than he had submitted.

But Inflation? Ha!
1945-1989 in 1988 dollars Reagan budgets totaled 2.4 dollars for each in other 32 years

Reagan “cut” taxes 4 times but “increased” taxes 11 times
His major income tax cut (750B) increased income revenue by 140B and his payroll tax increase got 201B increase in payroll tax revenues.

Reagan—not Congress—increased the size of government by 80%
Debt by 180%

Jobs—cut Carter growth rate by 24%
Initiated our involvement in 5 foreign conflicts
Had 137 investigated for crimes
Had more convicted than the “grand total” since 1900
Book: Ronald Reagan: “There he goes again” lists over 300 misstatements by Ron.

King Of Spend & Borrow Let Kids Pay Tomorrow

Bush II tried to outdo him
Increased Spending by 92% and Debt by 112%

Since 1980, three so called conservative presidents initiated our involvement in 10 foreign conflicts while creating only 99,000 net new jobs per month over 20 years.
Carter + Clinton got 222,000, or twice as many per month.
Clarence achmed Swinney boom boom boom facts destroy

Clarence –

If you want to crap on Reagan, one source for you might be Haynes Johnson’s “Sleep Walking Through History”.

Having reflected on Reagan as president, I believe he was the best since Eisenhower. I know my definition of what constitutes a good president and Johnson’s are very different. I suspect you are much more aligned with Johnson’s than mine.

I wish Reagan had stuck by principle than compromise.

Why are people wasting time talking about Reagan? He drug this country back from a Carter induced recession that cost me a business, so to me Ronny was a savior. He had more class, integrity and intelligence than all of this current adminstration put together!
Romny puzzles me a bit, Gingrich is too out there for my vote, and Paul is akin to Perow and not a viable candidate. I’d say Romney is the obvious choice with his business background, even though you liberal types continue to focus on a few failed companies that he and Bain were involved with, which is not relevant to anything. We absolutely have to dismiss this incompetent muslim lawyer in ‘our’ white house and elect a man with economic smarts. If we don’t we’ll be a third world nanny state in a few short years.

Dear foolish person. Do you have any idea what inflation is and when it really started to make a difference in the budget process? No? Ahhh now there is a surprise! This is similar elementally to the fictional claim by our current administration that inflation is not really a problem but then again they take care to exclude all of those things that are rising in price and so therefore we have the numbers that please them not the numbers that represent the truth. Want to do an accurate analysis? Use man hours instead of dollars. Man hours don’t inflate..dollars do.

Looks like Mr. Romney is going to be the Repubs candidate. I’ll probably vote for him unless Mr. Obama turns the economy around by the election.

You got to remember President Obama inherited alot of President Bush’s problems….

A President does not increase spending as Congress is in charge of passing the bills (spending)as the Executive proposes the budgets. But when Congress either goes along as in Bush’s case or even much worse under the latest Barack Obama’s case (Democrat’s) we the American taxpaying public becomes overwhelmed. Basic political science, clarence swinney—keep the story straight. Reagan had his problems but he sure was correct when he stated that government is not the solution but is the problem. Congressman Dr. Ron Paul is right and looks even better with each primary debate.

Sol of T, JFK was the last good president we had, and was murdered for being so!

wes, I was working at the Ford Motor Co. in “81″. We got laid off because the new LTD was a big flop. The workers weren’t the problem, the corner cutting, greed driven, profit before quality management was!!! The Louisville Assembly Plant was one of the most quality driven plants in the country! I was on the inside and cars go out the door that should’ve never been allowed to! But anyway after getting laid off, I was getting ready to start school under the TRA bill when your beloved Ronnie slashed the program. It wasn’t his fault that our auto industry had become the laughing stock of the world, but neither was it mine!!! And all you waiters and waitresses out there who have to rely on the generousity of your customers to make sure you make a living wage, y’all made the standard minimum until Ronnie Ray-gun got elected! This is what happens when Hollywood has-beens become the Commander and Chief, us workin’folk are dirt under their feet!!!

But has he made things ANY better simian?! I see the numbers on TV, but I don’t see any improvement in real life!!! I heard a friend of mine say she refused to but eggs at a certain store because the price was so rediculous. I told her she might as well go ahead and buy them, because I don’t think she’s going to find them any cheaper! And I fear that it’s only getting started! I see things getting a lot worse simian!!!

Clarence,
It’s quite a stretch of belief to think that Reagan willingly would encourage such irresponsible behavior while at the same time saying in the linked speech and others that Government was the Problem, Not the Solution. No doubt that Politicians lie, but to lie to such an extent as to change the mind of many formerly Brainwashed citizens encouraging them in the pursuit of Freedom? Only a very biased person would believe that he wasn’t genuine in his pursuit of LESS Government.

Well Dave it isn’t hard for me to reconcile the Reagan of the speeches and the Reagan of reality. The Reagan of speeches telling us about the importance of borders while looking the other way when meat packing companies sent busses to Mexico to get strike breakers and signing a fraud ridden amnesty that makes it virtually impossible to deport somebody who doesn’t want to.

Maybe you forgot Reagan was basically a brain dead pitchman practiced in delivering the words somebody else ginned up – like his days at GE.

The Reagan that talked about America so much but did so much to destroy the middle class and send their wealt to the upper classes via guest worker programs, free trade agreements and illegal immigration. The guy who push his failed tax policies onto the payroll tax so that he wouldn’t have to raise taxes on the wealthy but could make the wage earners pay for them.

Don’t forget how Reagan was elected, by making deals with terrorists to supply them arms! Yes, there is no proof, but given the whole Iran-Contra thing….. if it walks like a duck looks like a duck, quacks like a duck it must be a — great GOP president – LOL.

Seems both Mark and BBJ are in LA LA Land.

BBJ says, incredibly, “Don’t forget how Reagan was elected, by making deals with terrorists to supply them arms!”

You might begin explaining that nonsensical statement by telling us how deals with terrorists helped Reagan to get elected.

Vigalint
“You might begin explaining that nonsensical statement by telling us how deals with terrorists helped Reagan to get elected.”

Sorry I didn’t realize you were so young as to forget that the traitorous Reagan made a deal with the Iranians to supply them arms if they did not release the American Hostages – UNTIL HE WAS ELECTED!

Like I said no proof but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck….

So, I repeat, how did deals with terrorists help Reagan to get elected? You have not answered the question.

Go back and re-read your own posting.

Also DaveH, Reagan was vilified non-stop by the press during his term for draconian cuts to the budget. At the time I never understood that one as every year spending went up.

However, in the 90s I became aware of the flim-flam base-line budgeting scam and then understood that Reagan was vilified for cutting the amount of INCREASE in the budgets. Washington-speak BS.

Vigilant:

He can’t answer the question as it is make believe. It seems to me that Reagan won 49 of the 57 states. Must have been a lot of terrorists out there.

What makes you think Romney want do the same thing as Reagan, give in to the republican party wants?

Redfray:

There is no doubt about it.

I have not heard Romney mention how many illegal Cabinet posts and government agencies he will eiliminate, shut down, close up, shutter.

If Little Barry has not begun warring with Iran then Romnney will by the end of January 2013.

DaveH:

I watched it again as I remember watching him give that speech. It sure gave us something to look forward to (I just cannot use the word hope any longer)

I too, wish he had stuck to his guns and tossed Bobby Dole and his ilk out of the Oval Office when they came a whinin’.

Reagan was a changed man after he was shot by Hinkley Jr. And coincidentally, that was about 1 year into office. What a surprise.

Reagan was no conservative. Other than Ron Paul, the party hasn’t had one since Goldwater. Sure, Reagan at least used the veto (unlike the last republican disaster this country had to endure), but even using the veto he still managed to double the debt. So obviously he wasn’t nearly conservative enough. Instead of signing a bill that he endorsed, but the dems added something too it; he should have got on the tube every nite and told the American people, “look, I know I promised I would sign this bill if it reached my desk, but I couldn’t and heres why…”. But, to his credit he always asked for and never received the line item veto. But then again, the repubs don’t really want that anymore than the dems. Ron Paul 2101

Deerinwater,
Well granny has been doing her home work and now I will tell you my take on Ron Paul. He is feeding all of you what you want to hear. Talk about your life time career politician he certainly qualify’s for that. He has discovered how to keep you mushrooms growing on his side ! This man has been taking bills and filling them full of his own pork and knows when they will most likely pass or not and then when it comes time to vote for them he votes “NO” and when the bill passes he takes home the prize and all the while he can tell yu all that he voted against the bill ! He did and you are swallowing his fertelizer hook line and sinker. He is the master of the slight of hand. If you want to keep being fed that line of BS, then be my guest but not me. There is not a politician running out there that doesn’t have something to hide, so don’t try to make Ron Paul out to be such a saint. He isn’t and in my estimation he has made his career in politics of living off the tax payers long enough ! Time for him to retire !

You’re wrong, Granny. While Ron did indeed put his own pork in bills, why shouldn’t he? If somebody took your purse and passed out its contents to the crowd, wouldn’t you try to get some of it back?
More on that:
http://www.dailypaul.com/1135/ron-paul-earmarksno-pork-here

And Granny, name a politician who doesn’t do it?

THE 5 THINGS RON PAUL CAN and WILL DO if ELECTED PRESIDENT

So you know whom you are dealing with, I am and always have been A REGISTERED INDEPENDENT VOTER my entire life. That means I have stood on the side lines and watched for all of those Republican and Democratic caucuses, primaries, and so called debates over the years, while each CRIME FAMILY, I mean PARTY tried to impress on their backers the reasons why each candidate was best for the job. Not to mention what they have done to WE THE PEOPLE’S CONSTITUTION. Although I possess no diplomas or degrees I have studied two subjects like most people would study other subject matter such as Baseball stats. Those are Politics, and Finance. However weird a combination, it gives me insight pertaining to political individuals and current events that happen. This is why I know Ron Paul will do these five things if elected president. WE THE PEOPLE might have to ask for a couple of them , but at least our CONSTITUTION will be followed better than it has in the last at least 70 years.

Ron Paul is known as A LIBERTARIAN CONSTRUCTIONIST. Simply put, he adheres to the Constitution as written. I say WE THE PEOPLE could use that to our advantage. There are a lot of things A SITTING PRESIDENT cannot accomplish, that people seem to think they can. But A SITTING PRESIDENT that thinks like Ron Paul can accomplish several things, and by doing such can and will RIGHT MANY WRONGS done by previous administrations, both Republican and Democratic alike.

1)let us start by him giving back to the 50 Governors of each state the COMMAND of those NATIONAL GUARD TROOPS where it is supposed to be. That is why they are called THE NATIONAL GUARD.

2)No SITTING PRESIDENT has the power to close a military base, which takes an act of CONGRESS A SITTING PRESIDENT as COMMANDER IN CHIEF can have any military prison closed on their signature. GUANTANAMO BAY PRISON should be closed.

3)Kill The UNITARY EXECUTIVE DOCTRINE. I am not in favor of anyone, let alone a SITTING PRESIDENT believe that what ever he does, just because he is the SITTING PRESIDENT, even if he does something that is illegal, it is not illegal, because he is the president and PRESIDENTS DON’T DO ANYTHING ILLEGAL. Presidents should have to follow our laws just like every other citizen.

4)Although CONGRESS controls the purse strings, any SITTING PRESIDENT as COMMANDER IN CHIEF can order his Generals to GO ON HALF RATIONS, meaning start looking for cuts in military spending, like personnel, tools and materials, equipment, in a nut shell, everything is on the table except the base, as only CONGRESS can close a military base.

5)Officially call an end to MILITARY OPPERATIONS IN AFGHANISTAN and instruct the Generals to implement a TACTICAL WITHDRAW from that theatre. Congress can still control the purse strings, however what kind of purse do they need for a war that isn’t.

There are several reasons that people will use to not vote for Ron Paul, like that Ron Paul is against abortion and that is why they won’t vote for him. But of all of the reasons people say they won’t vote for Ron Paul, I say most if not all issues used in the negative so as to not allow the individual to vote for Ron Paul, these issues are secondary to WE THE PEOPLE taking back OUR CONSTITUTION, OUR WAY OF LIFE, OUR NATIONAL PRIDE, THE INTERNATIONAL RESPECT OF OTHER NATIONS, FOLLOWING THE NATIONAL RULE OF LAW, these are things that RON Paul can achieve as PRESIDENT if WE THE PEOPLE inform him of our intentions. He, like so many other politicians is not the perfect candidate, but look at what else is out there running for president. And while you are at it look who is sitting in the whitehouse. AMERICA cannot take much more of the pandering to the CORPORTOCRACY, by the BOUGHT and PAID FOR POLITICIANS in Washington D.C. and every state. WE THE PEOPLE HAVE TO REBUILD THIS GREAT NATION if we expect A COUNTRY OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, AND FOR THE PEOPLE. Ron Paul might not be perfect but again I say he is the best chance for AMERICA at this time in history. Use HIM LIKE HE WILL USE US.

WAKE UP AMERICA
OR SOON THERE WON’T BE ONE.

GROVER

Dr. Ron Paul is the best candidate we have and if anyone who really wants to have full insight of just what we are up against please read, “JFK and The Unspeakable, Why He Died And Why It Matters”, by James W, Douglass. Only then will your eyes and mind be opened to President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s farewell address speech just prior to President John Fitzgerald Kennedy’s inauguration as our 35th President, when he told the American public to beware of the power of the military-industrial complex. JFK enraged the CIA and the Pentagon on numerous occasions beginning with Bay of Pigs, plus his negative response to their desire for preemptive nuclear strike in the Soviet Union and in Cuba. When he declared that we would not send troops into Vietnam that was the last straw and he was terminated.

Bob Wire/Deerinheadlights:

You say, “Mitt is a text book example of what was unleashed on the American people back in 1982 by the “Gipper” and his policies.”

If that’s the case, and I don’t for a minute believe it, then Mitt’s the best thing since sliced bread. Mitt will never hold a candle to Reagan.

In retrospect, even liberals are coming around to the greatness of Reagan. Reganomics ushered in the longest sustained period of business prosperity in American history, something for which Bill Clinton dishonestly took credit. Reagan ended the Cold War, something so vitally important but minimized or untalked of on the MSM (and on this site).

Above all, Reagan brought back a spate of pride in America and what she stands for, something no president has been able to accomplish since, and something Obama is working just the opposite to quell.

Reagan ended the cold war? Reagan was gone before the USSR collapsed. What about all those guys who died in Vietnam and Korea? What about all the trillions spent on weapons in the 50s, 60s, and 70s? None of that matters to the Reagan myth believers. Everything bad that happened on his watch was always due to somebody else and anything that happened good 30 years after he left was due to Reagan – talk about a sickness the Reagan Derangement Syndrom.

Mark in LA LA Land, your history book must have been written by a lunatic. Korea and Vietnam occurred long before Reagan, who was president from 1981-89.

According to Wikipedia, “In November 1989, the Berlin Wall was torn down, the Cold War was officially declared over at a Malta Summit on December 3, 1989 and two years later, the Soviet Union collapsed.” So, Mark, who, in your mind, ended the Cold War?

By the way, the use of “xxx Derangement syndrome” is generally applied to those who have unreasoning hatred of xxx, not the opposite as you imply.

Don’t you get it Vigilent? I was pointing out the double standard you Reagan worshippers apply to him. He was never responsible for any of the failings during his term. The deficts weren’t his fault, the amnesty wasn’t his fault, the failure to enforce immigrations laws weren’t his fault but him being there are the tail end of a 50 year cold war gives him ALL the credit of that 50 year period.

You do realize he gave us the neocons don’t you? You do realize that the Russians almost launched a nuclear strike when they lost track of a scheduled launch of a Norwegian weather rocket in 1985 thanks to his constant belligerance don’t you? You do realize that ramping up the war on drugs and having the CIA help Contra drug dealers militarized the police and eroded our freedoms don’t you? You do realize that his approach to the financial markets allowed white collar criminal to run wild and gave us the S&L fiasco don’t you? You do realize that borrowing money the next guy has to pay back always makes your record look better than it really was, don’t you?

Do you understand that the CIA knew the USSR was spent in the late 70′s for the same reason we are going bankrupt, their vassal states provided nothing in the way of tribute to the home country. The idea that some moron giving a speech at the Berlin Wall and wasting billions on failed weapons programs like the A-10 or Divad gun brought the whole USSR down is as stupid as it gets and only an American could believe it. When Gorbachev was asked about this nonsense by some American reporter he said “That’s not a serious question”.

The USSR collapsed for a simple reason. Russia and all its vast wealth and resources WAS the USSR and it left. The Ukraine had always wanted out. Without Russia and the Ukraine the USSR was nothing so it might as well disintigrate. Lenin’s big mistake was to pretend each Soviet Republic was a separate state willingly part of something bigger rather than what it really was a vassal state under the Tsarist Russian Empire.

A hint to Mark in LA LA Land: Howard Zinn and his ilk are not legitimate sources for history. Your “analysis” of the fall of the USSR is laughable.

Vigilant, I don’t know how old Mark is or what they are teaching in school these days or while he was in school, but I sure as hell remember Lech Walesa and his gang got the ball rolling in Poland with a little help from Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and according to Mr. Walesa, most importantly the help of Pope John Paul II – (at least that is what I remember seeing and more importantly is what Mr. Walesa told me when I asked him about 10 years ago – of course, Mark probably knows something more than Mr. Walesa – though hearing it from Mr. Walesa himself will carry more weight with me)then fall of the Wall and that brought the rest of it (USSR) tumbling down.
Mr. Walesa said his organization had meetings with Reagan, but and it was big but, it was when the Pope came to Poland and stirred them up – He laughed and said his group of 10 became ten thousand and it kept growing. From then nothing became unstoppable and it caught on and moved forward through Eastern Germany and beyond. Lech Walesa, a simple man proved men could move mountains, sometimes with a little help…

Vigilant “In retrospect, even liberals are coming around to the greatness of Reagan. Reganomics ushered in the longest sustained period of business prosperity in American history, something for which Bill Clinton dishonestly took credit. Reagan ended the Cold War, something so vitally important but minimized or untalked of on the MSM (and on this site).”

Basically with Reagan’s tax cuts for the rich and being forced to raise taxes because of the deficit he caused, he pushed the tax burden down to the middle class. And you think that is what spurred economy? So right now we should do what? Double the tax on all people who draw a paycheck and give further cuts to the ultra rich trust fund babies?

ALL boats rose during that period of prosperity. Had Milton Friedman’s brand of economics been sustained, we would ALL be a lot better off today.

Perhaps you don’t understand the dictionary definition of “prosperity.”

“Perhaps you don’t understand the dictionary definition of “prosperity.”

What I do understand is that the economy sucked from 1980 to 1992. Reagan held the record for double digit unemployment up until the banking crisis in 2008. If you are trying to argue that Reagan set the stage for Clinton’s prosperity you need to look at the GDP growth.
It looks like there a slight increase due the amount of cash that he released into the economy (1984) and then a steady decline until Clinton took office.

Real Growth of Gross Domestic Product2

1973 5.2
1974 -0.5
1975 -1.3
1976 4.9
1977 4.7
1978 5.3
1979 2.5
1980 -0.5
1981 1.8
1982 -2.2
1983 3.9
1984 6.2
1985 3.2
1986 2.9
1987 3.1
1988 3.9
1989 2.5
1990 1.2
1991 -0.6
1992 2.3
1993 3.1
1994 4.1

To Vigilant, I agree with you! Ronald Reagan may not have been alot of things, but he truely was a AMERICAN. Having the best interest of the USA in his heart acted as a roadmap. When you’re a politician you have to jump in the mud pit on ocaission and therefore are prone to collect some mud along the way. He is finally being recognized by even the liberals as a pretty damn good president. The liberals are finally seing that he took over a complete failure of a presidency in that of Jimmy Carter and started down the right road with much success. I do believe that Clinton rode the wave of good times created by Reagan and had it not been for Monica and NAFTA and several other escapades, he may have been considered a decent president by the conservatives too. The main ingredient for a good president is that they are AMERICAN through and through. Reagan was a good man who achieved greatness primarily due to the fact that he was AMERICAN through and through. Bill

NAFTA was a Reagan brain fart – he just couldn’t get the Mexicans to go along on his watch so it fell to Bush I who negotiated it under so-called fast-track. All Clinton did was get it ratified. Start with the source of all evil if you want to be taken seriously by people who actually paid attention.

Mark in LA LA… I personally prospered more during Reagan’s Presidency than any time before or after! So you can babble till the cows come home, but I know prosperity when I live it (and especially looking back after living it! Jobs were plentiful, moderate but consistent raises, and comfortable enough to take an annual vacation. Can you match that now, Mark?

Vigilant says:
January 19, 2012 at 11:38 am
Bob Wire/Deerinheadlights:

“You say, “Mitt is a text book example of what was unleashed on the American people back in 1982 by the “Gipper” and his policies.”

If that’s the case, and I don’t for a minute believe it, then Mitt’s the best thing since sliced bread.”

Greatly beloved sentiments a side, I as aware of this common warm and fuzzy “mindset” but it fails to reflect a true and accurate picture of the times but only in the cherry picked broadest sense.If you wish to be blind to certain things, there little I can do about it.

Having no great interest or time to get “into” it, allow me to say, “let’s see how that works for you and Mitt”.

But, ~ Lucy has got some splaining to do.

I can certainly understand how you would have no interest in it, as you have failed to provide one detail so far. And your interest, as expected, would subside when pressed for a defense of your ridiculous assertions.

No, sir, I’m just not going to get into a dirty sock fight over something that you refuse to see.

You’re infatuation with Ronnie is well understood and in such ways I find understandable and deserving.

I was heeled up deep into the GOP and campaigned for Ronnie and the family was rewarded for our tireless,15 month long efforts with a Presidential appointment.

So when I say to you sir, “I know how you feel”, I mean, I know how you feel, and there is no need to continue, you have nothing to prove to me and I mean no disrespect.

Yes, the 80′s was horrible period in our country. However that is the best of America; anyone can say anything whether it is supported by facts or not, or whether it is what you want to hear. After Reagan’s economics program started to take effect, the economy grew and as tax cuts and reductions took effect, the treasury took ever more money in. This as democrats continued to spend. I particularly like it when democrat policies cause and exasperate conditions brought on by democrat polices, a Republican takes the white house and corrections are not immediate; so folks like you attribute a down turn to the Republican. As you will do in 2013, stay consistent though !

Mittball is also hiding money off shore in the Cayman Islands

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2088608/Mitt-Romney-millions-dollars-saved-offshore-Cayman-Islands-tax-shelters.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Show them thar tax returns Mittball, I dares ya!

moonbam,
So what if Mit has money off shore? Isn’t that what all these financial advisors on this web sight telling people to do with their money so they don’t loose it when TSHTF ? Why shouldn’t he do the same! I would hope he would be smart enough to do that especially if he were to get elected president. So he is smart enough to be able to make money, so why aren’t you? If you want to make money for yourself then you follow what the rich guys do and you do it too. Problem there being that most of you guys are to busy complaining about someone else to take note of your own finances and protect what you have erned. Now if that doesn’t apply to you and you have made the move to protect your finances then how can you complain about someone else doint the same ? I’m more concerned about the man in the WH destroying this country competely than I am about Mit Romney putting his money in an off shore bank to protect his money ! Good for him ! I haven’t made my choice yet but I certainly don’t condem him for that sort of thing. At least he has paid taxes where most of these creeps in Washington haven’t. That concerns me more than anything. How much money has Ron Paul got in off shore accounts? If he is a smart as some of you thik then he has his own off shore account, so get for real and make some kind of logical sense for once !